| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Product Details
|
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product)
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most helpful customer reviews
23 of 23 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars
More American than your beloved media,
By
This review is from: Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance (Hardcover)
You don't have to agree with everything Chomsky writes to find value in his work and his arguments. Before you accept any label that's been pinned on him, give his work a chance. His biggest crime just might be paying attention to facts, and questioning the praise we pour on ourselves, and actually caring about things like morality, and hypocrisy, and people. Chomsky is the antithesis of the kind of intellectual and pundit that corporate media prefers, and he directs much criticism toward this 'establishment'; indeed, he has compared intellectuals and elite opinion-makers to the commisars of Soviet Russia. This book is a sort of summation of material he has covered extensively before and since in different formats. The book proposes some important questions and considerations about this point in history. America finds itself in a state of unparalleled power in history. How do we use it? What is the cost of the quest for global dominance? The stakes are higher than ever. Terrorism, WMD, nuclear capability--these are things that threaten our existence. Are our current leaders really concerned with ending terrorism? Were they ever? What does the doctine of pre-emptive action mean, especially as applied to Iraq? And how long will people buy the same old stories that don't hold up under scrutiny? Who stands to really gain from global hegemony? Chomsky reviews recent events like 9/11, world reaction, the National Security Strategy of 2002, announcing a doctrine of pre-emption, and, of course, Iraq, which is being played out as an outstanding example of hypocrisy and blind embrace of power. Once again, he goes through some useful facts about Iraq and America, namely that Saddam was a US client who had to be punished when he stopped following US orders. But of course, we now care so much about the Iraqi people, you know, we liberated them. And we cared so much about them when we supported Saddamn's reign by wrecking the country with sanctions. It's such a sham, you wonder how Bush himself can not crack up when he defends the 'reasons' for the war (WMD, democracy, etc, etc), or how he and most politicians can hide their utter contempt for the man on the street, or for anyone who actually looks at reality. What is now clear in Chomsky's work is a very self-reflexive element, because Chomsky realizes how his work is viewed through the traditional doctrinal filters. Therefore, much of it seems like very, very bone dry humor, as he exposes the BS of politicians, elites, and ultimately ourselves. We're spreading democracy in Iraq...but are we really spreading democracy? Do we realy care about democracy, or the rights of all people, or freedom for everyone? Running through one case after another, the answer is quite different. There's a very good reason Chomsky is often dismissed, or simply despised. His work concerns elementary moral questions, intellectual honesty, and general concern for PEOPLE, not institutions, or even states. He's anything but anti-American, if anything, he's very American. He cherishes freedom, and he routinely states that many of our American freedoms are unique and unprecedented. He reminds us that in a democracy, in a real democracy, you don't 'rally to the leader', you don't blindly worship the state. If we believe in freedom, real freedom, then we question power structures and their authority over us, and we reject them if they're not legitimate. Chomsky is not a 'liberal', he is radical, his criticism is for the entire system and its track record. He does not have a 'master plan', and he would reject anyone who claims to. Notice he's been called everything under the sun: Marxist, Nazi, Stalinist, Communist, anti-American, deranged, etc, etc, etc. His answer? Yeah, you DO have to be deranged to pay attention to things like elementary morality, and to actually have concern for your fellow man. Highly recommended reading for anyone who wants to think about current events, to seriously think, and to look outside the very narrow spectrum of debate in this country that is favored by the media and intellectuals.
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars
One Third Rehash, One Third New Stuff, One Third Vital,
By Robert D. Steele (Oakton, VA United States) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance (Hardcover)
Chomsky brilliantly brings forth a theme first articulated in recent times by Jonathan Schell ("Unconquerable World") by pointing out that the *only* "superpower" capable of containing the neo-conservative, neo-totalitarian, neo-Nazi militarism and unilateralism of the current Bush Administration is "the planet's public." Chomsky updates his work with both excellent and well-balanced footnotes and an orderly itemization of the arrogance, militarism, contempt for international law, arbitrary aggression, and--Bible thumpers take note--proven track record for supporting dictators, Israeli genocide against Palestinians, and US troop participation in--directly as well as indirectly--what will inevitably be judged by history to be a continuing pattern of war crimes. Chomsky, past master of the topic of "manufacturing consent" now turns his attention to the manner in which the Bush Administration is attempting to establish "new norms" that, if permitted to stand, will reverse 50 years of human progress in seeking the legitimization of governance, respect for human rights, and collective decision-making and security. He is especially strong on documenting the manner in which US aid grows in direct relation to the degree to which the recipient country is guilty of genocidal atrocities, with Colombia and Turkey being prime examples. The case can be made, and Chomsky makes it, that the US arms industry, and US policies on the selling and granting of arms world-wide, are in fact a direct US commitment to repression, genocide, and terrorism sponsored by one big state: the US. He is most interesting when he discusses the new US approach to repression, the privatization of actions against the underclasses of the world. Morality plays big with Chomsky, who brings new ideas in with his discussion of moral asymmetry and the lack of moral integrity in US decision-making. Sadly, the US public is both ignorant and unengaged, and do not realize the crass immorality of all that is being done "in their name." Chomsky reminds us that George Bush the Second pardoned a known international terrorist, Luis Posada Carriles, because of his ties to the extremist Cuban-American community that his brother Jeb Bush is so dependent upon for support. Over the course of the middle of the book Chomsky addresses the competing models for national development, with Cuba prominent as an alternative model that the US has sought to destroy, as the US worked very hard to destroy Catholic "liberation theology" because of its temerity in believing that the poor should be protected against repressive governments and their American corporate paymasters. Chomsky is correct, I believe, when he states and documents that the US model of capitalism has pathologically high rates of inequality and poverty (even CNN has noticed--as I waited for an airplane in Salt Lake City, a bastion of common sense, the lead story was the collapse of the US middle class). Chomsky moves from his discussion of exceptions to US capitalism to a discussion of the importance of regional differentiation, and this is of course in direct competition with the US view that the world should be a homogenized generic variation of the US culture, with one big difference: 80% of the benefits for the US, while the rest of the world shares the left-overs. Chomsky agrees with Dr. Col Max Manwaring and other mainstream strategists (see my review of "The Search for Security" when he identifies the legitimacy of governments, and the sanctity of human and civil rights, as the two litmus tests for determining if balance and fairness exist in a society. By this measure, the US is now failing. The book begins to conclude with a semantic discussion of terrorism, what is terror, who sponsors terror, and here Chomsky draws on both his linguistic and historical background to make the case that the US is the primary sponsor of terrorism in the world (something both the Indonesian and Malaysian leadership would tend to agree with), and he notes that the US, in a bi-partisan manner among the elite, has consistently been hypocritical about terrorism. Nelson Mandela, and his resistance party, were labeled terrorists by the US for many years. Are we in a passing nightmare, or the beginning of a renaissance? The jury is still out. I personally believe that John McCain would have been a vastly superior president that this lightweight bully that we have now, with his out-of-control neo-conservatives, none of whom ever served in uniform and some of whom--as with Dick Cheney--were active draft dodgers. However, I also believe that both John McCain, and Dick Gephardt if he were to be elected, are too close to the "business as usual" crowd of beltway politicians capitalized by beltway bandits. In other words, Howard Dean would not have been possible without the excesses of George Bush Junior. God does indeed work in mysterious ways, and I pray that the American public will both read Chomsky, and understand that they represent the only super-power that can restore legitimacy, sanity, comity, and prosperity to the American Republic. Down with the carpetbaggers--El Pueblo Avansa--EPA!.
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
A summary of Chomsky's view, backed by current information,
By SPM "scott_maykrantz" (Eugene, Oregon) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance (Hardcover)
During the 1990s, quite a few Chomsky books were compilations of previously-published material. He built books out of transcripts of talks, long interviews, and articles from Z magazine. Those books are all very good, but many of them had a scattered feel to them. In "Hegemony or Survival," he returns to the days when he sits at the typewriter and pounds out a new book.This time, Chomsky sums up over 30 years of research on US foreign policy. He uses the current war in Iraq and the history of our policy toward Cuba as his key cases. That's not to say he leaves out other countries. In fact, this book mentions one country after another in which the US government worked hard to overthrow democracy abroad while covering it up at home. But, by putting emphasis on Cuba and Iraq, Chomsky shows the consistency of US policy --- the methods, the tactics, the justifications, and the effects. It's the wide range of information that makes the book so convincing. Chomsky doesn't write opinion pieces. He presents you with a flood of facts, fully documented, and allows those facts to convince you. As you read, you'll say "Wow. Is that really true?" and flip to the footnotes. You'll find credible sources every time. You'll shake your head, wondering how you could have missed such important information. At some point, you end up reading with a finger wedged in the footnote section, flipping back and forth and making mental notes to double-check some of those sources later. If you haven't read Chomsky before, start with one of the better interview books such as "Understanding Power" and "Chronicles of Dissent." Then read this one. If you want to understand "Why do they hate us?" (and why that isn't even the right question to ask), Chomsky has the answers.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
Want to see more reviews on this item?
|
Most recent customer reviews |
|
|
|